EVE Search - Database overload time to delete inactive accounts

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Database overload time to delete inactive accounts

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
smeggy Minmatar	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:17:00 - [1] Ive always wondered about this little thing that the devs said about 2 years ago. We will not delete any player account that is inactive in the foreseeable future unless it becomes absolutely necessary. Well I know many accounts that have been inactive for over 2 years and a few for more than 3 years. Would CCP consider deleting some of these accounts and freeing up some valuable database space. Many of these accounts I am sure have bookmarks in place as well as all the items they own. If someone hasnt activated their account in over 18 months I am sure they will never be played again. The items of that players account can be inherited by their corp and those corps that are active will use in some way those items turning them into something else thats going to be used or mins etc. Those who are in npc corps the items will just be deleted. I would have thought that would clear out a large and significant amount of database resources that are being wasted. So is it time for ccp to delete these old non active accounts? This could also happen to corps that have died and have 0 members in them.
Ediz Daxx FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:18:00 - [2] Providing facts on what you claim is a good start.
The Enslaver Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:21:00 - [3] I don't think the number of inactive accounts is having any sort of significant effect on server performance... --------
Resolve	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:27:00 - [4] Databse entries does not equal less performance. If someone's been inactive, they're just an entry in the database that does not get accessed. Accessing the DB is what takes CPU time. Non-active players do not cause lag or decrease performance, no matter how many items or BMs they have. Many people take breaks from EVE and some come back after a year+ to see what's changed and to try again. Deleting their accounts helps no-one. And just deleting items from NPC corp members is so not an option. Just because someone left their corp before taking a break doesn't mean they should be targeted for deletion, give me a break. No it is not time to delete the inactive accounts.
Ardent Glory	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:39:00 - [5] Originally by: Resolve Removing inactive corps to free up some corp names may be an option, but that also has ramifications, namely Employment History. Actually that makes no difference. My old corp doesn't exist anymore, but it still appears in my employment history....
Resolve	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:45:00 - [6] Edited by: Resolve on 03/09/2006 20:46:02 Originally by: Ardent Glory Originally by: Resolve Removing inactive corps to free up some corp names may be an option, but that also has ramifications, namely Employment History. Actually that makes no difference. My old corp doesn't exist anymore, but it still appears in my employment history.... It does make a difference. Say you worked for Corp X, then it gets removed and another Corp X is formed and you join it. How can anyone tell which is which? You'll have two entries for Corp X in your history, even though they're totally different. Seeing who has done what will become a PITA, looking at which corp a player has been with and checking which dates Corp X has been active/reformed.

Valar	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:47:00 - [7] I've looked into deleting old accounts. The benefit, in terms of freeing up items and getting rid of their bookmarks is less then the weekly amount of itemIDs that go to the trash locations. So, nothing is really gained from doing it. ------ Valar Database admin - Server operations team CCP Games How to write a good bugreport

Resolve	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:49:00 - [8] Edited by: Resolve on 03/09/2006 20:56:22 Thanks Valar, that confirms what I was thinking. Yes, it takes up space, but doesn't cause lag or a decrease in performance. If space is an issue, sure things can be done. Deleting accounts/items from 'inactive' people would be a last resort IMO. If CCP has some spare HD space (I'm sure they do), it is just not an issue.
Bazman Caldari The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:50:00 - [9] Originally by: Valar I've looked into deleting old accounts. The benefit, in terms of freeing up items and getting rid of their bookmarks is less then the weekly amount of itemIDs that go to the trash locations. So, nothing is really gained from doing it. Can you trash all my noob ships for me? Seriously, going through my assets list, those are bound to cause at least 50% of the server lag. yeegads ----- Sig removed, maximum allowed image dimensions are 400x120 and maximum allowed size is 24,000 bytes. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -wystler Hi TUXFORD! Blasterboat for tier 3 Gallente battleship please! Make it look cool too. Thanks. I am a
Resolve	Posted - 2006.09.03 20:55:00 - [10] Originally by: Bazman Originally by: Valar I've looked into deleting old accounts. The benefit, in terms of freeing up items and getting rid of their bookmarks is less then the weekly amount of itemIDs that go to the trash locations. So, nothing is really gained from doing it. Can you trash all my noob ships for me? Seriously, going through my assets list, those are bound to cause at least 50% of the server lag. yeegads They'll maybe cause lag when/if you check your assets. Back to the OP, just having those entries in the DB won't cause lag. If you check your assets every 5 seconds sure, that'll probably cause lag, but that's YOUR fault, not EvE's.
MadGaz Finite Horizon	Posted - 2006.09.03 21:09:00 - [11] Does the amount of abandoned noob ships/shuttles/drones in space take up much resources? Makes my scanner lag alot --------------------------- What can I put here without getting banned? Tell me you luv me, and it will all be okay - Immy Make me a sig and I will.
Skawl GeoTech	Posted - 2006.09.03 21:10:00 - [12] Originally by: Bazman Can you trash all my noob ships for me? Seriously, going through my assets list, those are bound to cause at least 50% of the server lag. yeegads You know you can trash stuff remotely from the assests window right?
Shadowsword Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.09.03 21:22:00 - [13] Originally by: MadGaz Does the amount of abandoned noob ships/shuttles/drones in space take up much resources? Makes my scanner lag alot I think it lag out your initial load, as the client's graphic engine charge the ship models, position, textures... and, after that, does absolutely nothing. I'd be very surprised if an empty ship were taking even a quarter of the ressources a player ship takes. ------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy.
Norath84 Gallente Idle Haven	Posted - 2006.09.03 22:26:00 - [14] Originally by: Valar I've looked into deleting old accounts. The benefit, in terms of freeing up items and getting rid of their bookmarks is less then the weekly amount of itemIDs that go to the trash locations. So, nothing is really gained from doing it. Another benefit is all the names it woud free upp... I had to pick a difrent name for my main as the name i wanted to use was taken.. Later (3 mnd) I rememberd that the char holding my name was a trial i made 2,5 years ago... Ps. if that ever gets fixed is there a chance i can have my name change back to norath ---------------------------------------------------------- New Ship Idea: Small Freighters (100k m¦) in EVE
Mrmuttley House of Tempers	Posted - 2006.09.03 23:20:00 - [15] Originally by: Norath84 Another benefit is all the names it woud free upp... I had to pick a difrent name for my main as the name i wanted to use was taken.. Later (3 mnd) I rememberd that the char holding my name was a trial i made 2,5 years ago... Ps. if that ever gets fixed is there a chance i can have my name change back to norath Thats actually a good reason not to delete accounts and therefore their characters IMHO. Aside from the opportunities to mis-use a name that was well known but has now retired theres alsowhat you might call sentimental reasons. A good RL friend of mine died at the tail end of last year. If you decided to delete accounts after a say a year or somesuch and the characters went with it then in theory at least someone could end up flying around with my freinds avatars name. Meeting that new pilot would be freaky tosay the least. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I am Dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated. Originally by: Rod Blaine Eve is not supposed to be fair
DropZone 187	Posted - 2006.09.03 23:20:00 - [16] First off, thanks for the clarification Valar. Nice to see a dev respond and hopefully it will happen more often. (Then again I would expect the extinction of forum trolls, but that is a high hope in itself) Secondly, out of curiosity, and also to put to bed the myths/rumors of bm impacts, roughly how much space as a percentage would be freed up if bms were all deleted? I think that would be big question. I got an idea, ban forum trolls!
Duban Banned	Posted - 2006.09.03 23:23:00 - [17] i'd say delete all old trial accounts, THAT at least has to be taking up a lot of space.

Valar	Posted - 2006.09.04 00:46:00 - [18] Originally by: DropZone 187 First off, thanks for the clarification Valar. Nice to see a dev respond and hopefully it will happen more often. (Then again I would expect the extinction of forum trolls, but that is a high hope in itself) Secondly, out of curiosity, and also to put to bed the myths/rumors of bm impacts, roughly how much space as a percentage would be freed up if bms were all deleted? I think that would be big question. I got an idea, ban forum trolls! Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. EDIT: I'd like to add that the bookmarks table is the biggest table in the whole database. ------ Valar Database admin - Server operations team CCP Games How to write a good bugreport

PKlavins Caldari eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.09.04 00:50:00 - [19] Originally by: Valar Originally by: DropZone 187 First off, thanks for the clarification Valar. Nice to see a dev respond and hopefully it will happen more often. (Then again I would expect the extinction of forum trolls, but that is a high hope in itself) Secondly, out of curiosity, and also to put to bed the myths/rumors of bm impacts, roughly how much space as a percentage would be freed up if bms were all deleted? I think that would be big question. I got an idea, ban forum trolls! Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Quote: "Meanwhile, in CCP-HQ, BoB and their fanboys plotted domination of jovian teletubbies first -eris Woot right behind Eris \o/ - Xorus In Soviet Russia, Signature Mods You! -Ivan K ^YEA! Pffffftttt - Immy
Thrawntl Caldari Research Associates	Posted - 2006.09.04 00:51:00 - [20] Thats really big, delete all the BM's! Put in warp to 2km to target, but still allow bks to be made but now allow them to be made near 15km of a stargate.
MysticNZ Solstice Systems Development Concourse	Posted - 2006.09.04 00:52:00 - [21] Damm... forgot what I was going to say... Oh yeah, why does it take so much cpu when copying bms? What is going on? Could they not be placed in a bm queue type system where it is only executed when the load of the server is low? -=====- Xorus is teh nub :D I heard that beats player with big stick now be a good carebear and mine me some veldspar - Xorus
Tsavong Lah Caldari Solar Storm Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.09.04 00:58:00 - [22] Originally by: MysticNZ Damm... forgot what I was going to say... Oh yeah, why does it take so much cpu when copying bms? What is going on? Could they not be placed in a bm queue type system where it is only executed when the load of the server is low? This is because BMs aren't stored as a normal item type (like, say, a ship or module) they're stored as being related to the character. When you copy a BM, it gets copied into a real item, then back in to a bookmark and moved. That is more operations than trading modules/minerals across. I won't speak about my opinions of bookmarks, but I do sincerely hope that whatever solution/fix the developers choose is one that does a good job of reducing system load. I'm sure people could live without the ability to copy instas if it meant an extra few hours' uptime every week. I got a jar of dirt!

Valar	Posted - 2006.09.04 00:58:00 - [23] Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. ------ Valar Database admin - Server operations team CCP Games How to write a good bugreport

PKlavins Caldari eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.09.04 01:04:00 - [24] Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. seems that deleting BM's would be a godsend... devs, time to push the Big Red Button...delete the BM's!!! Quote: "Meanwhile, in CCP-HQ, BoB and their fanboys plotted domination of jovian teletubbies first -eris Woot right behind Eris \o/ - Xorus In Soviet Russia, Signature Mods You! -Ivan K ^YEA! Pffffftttt - Immy

Valar	Posted - 2006.09.04 01:09:00 - [25] Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. seems that deleting BM's would be a godsend... devs, time to push the Big Red Button...delete the BM's!!! Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. When I look at database traces, all I see are bookmarks loading, being insterted, copied or changing owners. Nothing else in the database takes such a long time, so it doesn't show up in my traces, well except for the odd standing update and one lsc(large scale chat) proc. ------ Valar Database admin - Server operations team CCP Games How to write a good bugreport

PKlavins Caldari eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.09.04 01:11:00 - [26] Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. seems that deleting BM's would be a godsend... devs, time to push the Big Red Button...delete the BM's!!! Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. When I look at database traces, all I see are bookmarks loading, being insterted, copied or changing owners. Nothing else in the database takes such a long time, so it doesn't show up in my traces. this wil probably be answered tomorrow since its dead of the night in iceland...but... is there ANY chance of BM's being deleted? we have a dev on our side... Quote: "Meanwhile, in CCP-HQ, BoB and their fanboys plotted domination of jovian teletubbies first -eris Woot right behind Eris \o/ - Xorus In Soviet Russia, Signature Mods You! -Ivan K ^YEA! Pffffftttt - Immy
Yipeekahyay Gallente TribalWar Inc EVE Animal Control	Posted - 2006.09.04 01:12:00 - [27] Edited by: Yipeekahyay on 04/09/2006 01:12:42 Originally by: DropZone 187 First off, thanks for the clarification Valar. Nice to see a dev respond and hopefully it will happen more often. And that's why Eve has my monthly subscription. Regardless of how many people whine about the devs or Eve itself, it's obvious the devs actually take the time to feel out the community. "Making a speech on economics is a bit like ing down your leg. It seems hot to you but never to anyone else." Lyndon B Johnson

Valar	Posted - 2006.09.04 01:17:00 - [28] Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. seems that deleting BM's would be a godsend... devs, time to push the Big Red Button...delete the BM's!!! Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. When I look at database traces, all I see are bookmarks loading, being insterted, copied or changing owners. Nothing else in the database takes such a long time, so it doesn't show up in my traces. this wil probably be answered tomorrow since its dead of the night in iceland...but... is there ANY chance of BM's being deleted? we have a dev on our side... Something will be done about bookmarks. Game design is working on something, I don't know the details of it. But they sure as hell know what I, the development DBA, PapaSmurf the network programmer and Fuhry the lead programmer think about bookmarks. ------ Valar Database admin - Server operations team CCP Games How to write a good bugreport

PKlavins Caldari eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.09.04 01:21:00 - [29] Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. seems that deleting BM's would be a godsend... devs, time to push the Big Red Button...delete the BM's!!! Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. When I look at database traces, all I see are bookmarks loading, being insterted, copied or changing owners. Nothing else in the database takes such a long time, so it doesn't show up in my traces. this wil probably be answered tomorrow since its dead of the night in iceland...but... is there ANY chance of BM's being deleted? we have a dev on our side... Something will be done about bookmarks. Game design is working on something, I don't know the details of it. But they sure as hell know what I, the development DBA, PapaSmurf the network programmer and Fuhry the lead programmer think about bookmarks. w00t proof that devs listen to us is here people... any ETA on the 'fix'? and i dont mean the 5-copy-at-a-time thing... Quote: "Meanwhile, in CCP-HQ, BoB and their fanboys plotted domination of jovian teletubbies first -eris Woot right behind Eris \o/ - Xorus In Soviet Russia, Signature Mods You! -Ivan K ^YEA! Pffffftttt - Immy
MysticNZ Solstice Systems Development Concourse	Posted - 2006.09.04 01:50:00 - [30] Good to hear... I really don't understand what is wrong with this idea. Warp to gate option and allowing bubbles to be placed in low sec with a larger sec hit than normal (.5). Solves all problems IMO. -=====- Xorus is teh nub :D I heard that beats player with big stick now be a good carebear and mine me some veldspar - Xorus
Infinity Ziona Feet Corporation	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:03:00 - [31] Originally by: MysticNZ Good to hear... I really don't understand what is wrong with this idea. Warp to gate option and allowing bubbles to be placed in low sec with a larger sec hit than normal (.5). Solves all problems IMO. We've already had huge discussions about this subject and there will be no consesus reached in this thread so its a waste of the thread to argue about it even more. If all the people on a specific node or jumping to a specific node deleted their bookmarks would the node they are on be less likely to queue them? Sounds like it and if so then the people complaining about being queued could actually be causing a lot of the their own queuing. Click Me
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:31:00 - [32] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/09/2006 02:31:57 No, it dosn't "sound like it". You could have zero BM's, and if you try and jump into a node which contains a heavily loaded system then you're quewed. It has nothing to do with that YOU do. At all. Futher, that's pure speculation which is not supported by the evidence. Further, I disagree with your avowed method od reducing lag by reducing the number of players. //Maya
Infinity Ziona Feet Corporation	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:40:00 - [33] Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/09/2006 02:31:57 No, it dosn't "sound like it". You could have zero BM's, and if you try and jump into a node which contains a heavily loaded system then you're quewed. It has nothing to do with that YOU do. At all. Futher, that's pure speculation which is not supported by the evidence. Further, I disagree with your avowed method od reducing lag by reducing the number of players. Well look at this: Originally by: Valar And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. The server queues people when the node they are on or jumping to reaches 95% or more. When a fleet is jumping into a system and suddenly gets queued, its seems possible that if they were jumping to a new node and each person had a lot of bookmarks, which is very likely for fleet op people, that that might increase the load on the server and cause the queueing. That seems a reasonable assumption based on what Valar was saying above. But I am sure you'll majick some irrelevancies and random speculative facts to entirely 110% discount my theory. Click Me
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:51:00 - [34] All speculative. Entirely speculative. They're not nerfing it, they're nerfing BM copying, indicating that THAT is the real source of the issue not the handoff. And right, you have to take a bash because you feel insecure, right. All done? yawns //Maya
LE suck	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:02:00 - [35] No maya, it's because you're an obnoxious little ** who thinks they know it all. You remind me of comic book guy with your arrogant holier-than-thou, *** lodged up ass manner of speaking. You're the reason people pray to jesus for an ignore button on the forums.
Vaslav Tchitcherine Swag Co.	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:16:00 - [36] CCP NERF MAYA KTHX. Or something. Relax. Life without dissent would be pretty boring. v. swag
Reiisha Frontier Technologies	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:19:00 - [37] Originally by: Maya Rkell All speculative. Entirely speculative. They're not nerfing it, they're nerfing BM copying, indicating that THAT is the real source of the issue not the handoff. And right, you have to take a bash because you feel insecure, right. All done? yawns You realize that you are speculating on this too, right? Jeez.
ThunderGodThor KIA Corp	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:25:00 - [38] Valar would the solotion of making BMs client side rather then sever side reduce the load on the servers and would it take care of the lag and extra load that happens when you change nodes?
hendo001 Caldari Quantum Tech Mining	Posted - 2006.09.04 04:42:00 - [39] If bookmarks are to be nerf'd or replaced somehow, the improvemnts would help and be welcomed right? so if the commuity had a reasonable solution to the bookmark/insta problem, would it not be feesable to hold a general disscussion or some type of vote? I;m sure that if the developers could present us the community with a list of options, then let the players choose by means of a vote on a system to replace the instas/bookmarks this would be ok? Just a thought... Visit the QTM forums Linkage Also visit my blog Linkage
fuze Gallente Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.09.04 05:16:00 - [40] Just wondered with recent BM copying frenzy how hard the BM table grew the last weeks. With people having sets over 10k range you'd end up with several hundreds of millions records and that should make DBA wary. With BM tables being 14% in size I just wonder how much CPU those queries take up during peaks and avg load. What size of the cache it takes up etc. And those statistics might even be interesting for microsoft since these larger real-time databases are rather scarce.
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:17:00 - [41] Originally by: Valar Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. There are people with 50k bookmarks? WTF? I've been playing for over 2.5 years and my main probably only has around a thousand or so. -- (Battle hardened miner) [Brackley, UK] WARNING:This post may contain large doses of reality.
Zodiaq Gallente	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:24:00 - [42] And whats the big problem to make BMs as files?? Mechanics would stay exactly the same, but ALL LOAD will be moved from DB to clients... and we could at last easly share them with friends!! I don't see any problem here... is there any? Zodiaq
Estelle Matsuko Caldari The Beiatch Corp Inc	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:42:00 - [43] Edited by: Estelle Matsuko on 04/09/2006 08:43:40 Originally by: Zodiaq Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:29:11 Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:27:01 And whats the big problem to make BMs as files?? Rather than keeping BMs in DB everyone would have special dir in game dir with BMs... Mechanics would stay exactly the same, but ALL LOAD will be moved from DB to clients... and we could at last easly share them with friends!! I don't see any problem here... -BMs->files -vouchers->new books with BMs list (to keep all selected BMs in one place, not in xxxx vouchers) So what's the big deal? Just do it! because if bm¦s are "player side" no matter how they are encrypted, they WILL be hacked and exploited. Delete all current BM¦s. Give everyone the ability to make thier own bm¦s but NOT the ability to copy them. If you want em, make your own. 14% is a freaking large percentage of the DB
Infinity Ziona Feet Corporation	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:42:00 - [44] Originally by: Zodiaq Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:29:11 Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:27:01 And whats the big problem to make BMs as files?? Rather than keeping BMs in DB everyone would have special dir in game dir with BMs... Mechanics would stay exactly the same, but ALL LOAD will be moved from DB to clients... and we could at last easly share them with friends!! I don't see any problem here... -BMs->files -vouchers->new books with BMs list (to keep all selected BMs in one place, not in xxxx vouchers) So what's the big deal? Just do it! I believe tis that pesky Qaulity Control thing and considering all the ramifications of the change. Click Me
Juwi Kotch Gallente VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD	Posted - 2006.09.04 09:06:00 - [45] Two possibilities: Valar has got the task to slowly prepare the playerbase that bookmarks will be deleted/altered/limited. Valar is frustrated with the indecisiveness or slow proceedings of the game designers to solve the bookmark problem and vents off here. Giving the date, time and tone of his postings, I'm tempted to bet on the second possibility. By the way: I'm around for more then a year, and have 0 bookmarks, besides the automatic mission ones, and the occational can to loot or system to approach for a trading task. My corporation has complete bookmark sets for all regions, though, and quite some members are just copying as many bookmarks as they can, before the copying limit kicks in. Juwi Kotch
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2006.09.04 09:41:00 - [46] Valar for president,hey man you could press the red button and by doing so deleting all BM and prevent them from being copied ,i would marry you(and i'am male )
Sharcy Sonnema	Posted - 2006.09.04 09:56:00 - [47] Edited by: Sharcy on 04/09/2006 09:56:23 Originally by: Valar Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. While we're waiting for a permanent fix, in the mean time, you could "accidentally" type this: DROP TABLE bookmarks; [ENTER] Don't tell anyone you got it from me, 'kay? --

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2006.09.04 10:45:00 - [48] Originally by: Sharcy Edited by: Sharcy on 04/09/2006 09:56:23 Originally by: Valar Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. While we're waiting for a permanent fix, in the mean time, you could "accidentally" type this: DROP TABLE bookmarks; [ENTER] Don't tell anyone you got it from me, 'kay? Just make sure Valar includes the following statement when dropping the bookmarks and I'm all for removing BM's update eveNames set itemName = Replace(itemName, 'Amarr VIII (Oris)', 'Amarr VIII (Chribba)') where itemName like 'Amarr VIII (Oris)%' EVE-Files \| EVE-Search \| Monitor this Thread

Lazuran	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:00:00 - [49] Originally by: smeggy Ive always wondered about this little thing that the devs said about 2 years ago. We will not delete any player account that is inactive in the foreseeable future unless it becomes absolutely necessary. Well I know many accounts that have been inactive for over 2 years and a few for more than 3 years. Would CCP consider deleting some of these accounts and freeing up some valuable database space. Your view is far too simplistic. Databases always have parts that are more frequently used than others and the total size is rarely an issue (storage is cheap), it's only the total size of the frequently accessed data that can pose a problem. CCP has mentioned that they have their transaction logs on a RamSan, which ran out of space a couple of times. This is the problem, not the inactive accounts (which are actually good, since the only reason some people came back to EVE is that they could use their frozen accounts/characters again after many months). It is also important to realize that these performance issues are TECHNICAL problems and they should have TECHNICAL solutions and not be compensated by a modified gameplay like many people have proposed. The bookmark nerf was bad and it was nothing less than CCP giving up on trying to solve the technical problems with BMs. It makes me worry about what's next. Will they "solve" the gang overview bugs by limiting the number of people in a gang to a maximum of 10? "The whole of NYC is not 1.0. Some back alley in the Bronx is deep 0.0, while right outside NYPD headquarters is 1.0." -- Slaaght Bana
Sable Schroedinger Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:01:00 - [50] Originally by: Valar Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. Just a though, I know this one is untidy and breaks a few design rules, but this could be a temp fix should design team take their time (over a year or so). BMs are geographically based, you only get to use the ones that you are in the right system for, so one could conclude you only need the ones in your current region. Therefore, at the extreme, breaking existing BMs table down into regonal tables and only loading to a player the ones for their current system would lower the search overhead and the amount that are transfered between nodes. If the breaking down to separate tables offends your sensibilities too much (it kinda sticks with me), simply filtering down to current region would most likely help. Yes this would only help for so long, but my buy time for something better - like removing insta's! -------------------------------------------- Nothing is as cruel as the righteousness of innocents
Tachy	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:04:00 - [51] Originally by: Sable Schroedinger Originally by: Valar [...] Just a though, I know this one is untidy and breaks a few design rules, but this could be a temp fix should design team take their time (over a year or so). BMs are geographically based, you only get to use the ones that you are in the right system for, so one could conclude you only need the ones in your current region. Therefore, at the extreme, breaking existing BMs table down into regonal tables and only loading to a player the ones for their current system would lower the search overhead and the amount that are transfered between nodes. If the breaking down to separate tables offends your sensibilities too much (it kinda sticks with me), simply filtering down to current region would most likely help. Yes this would only help for so long, but my buy time for something better - like removing insta's! I use BM to set the course for my AP ... --==*-- Even with nougat, you can have a perfect moment.
Ilmonstre Minmatar 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:07:00 - [52] Edited by: Ilmonstre on 04/09/2006 11:07:38 Originally by: Andrue Originally by: Valar Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. There are people with 50k bookmarks? WTF? I've been playing for over 2.5 years and my main probably only has around a thousand or so. well andrue is you are a nomad like me you kinda have more like me. i have almost all regions am like only missing 2 or so. i find them sp usefull but i will be happy when they change/fix it or however you wanna call it as that will help alot iin the gameplay and most likely the database problems edit: ooh and hell no to deleating them i have had 3 people i know in rl that came back becouse they could use their old char still so its a very usefull thing as i am sure they are not the only ones that did that.
Miss Overlord Gallente Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:08:00 - [53] maybe 10 instead of 5 as the limit otherwise it looks good
Sable Schroedinger Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:15:00 - [54] and if it was 10, then 20 would be wanted. If theres a limit, someone always wants more. -------------------------------------------- Nothing is as cruel as the righteousness of innocents
Tachy	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:16:00 - [55] How much extra DB- and Serverload did the careless announcement of the BM-Copy-Limit produce over the weekend? Do you mind giving some numbers? --==*-- Even with nougat, you can have a perfect moment.
Kuolematon Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:59:00 - [56] YASSTBMI (Yet Another Simple Solution to BookMark Issue): - Warp to 5km - Make that STOP button will cancel your current jump, thus no need for safespots. - Reduce amount of "space storage SS's" to 256 per character. Done! Unnerf Amarr! "Just because you can utterly ruin another player's game doesn't mean that you must."
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2006.09.04 12:21:00 - [57] Originally by: Chribba Originally by: Sharcy Edited by: Sharcy on 04/09/2006 09:56:23 Originally by: Valar Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. While we're waiting for a permanent fix, in the mean time, you could "accidentally" type this: DROP TABLE bookmarks; [ENTER] Don't tell anyone you got it from me, 'kay? Just make sure Valar includes the following statement when dropping the bookmarks and I'm all for removing BM's update eveNames set itemName = Replace(itemName, 'Amarr VIII (Oris)', 'Amarr VIII (Chribba)') where itemName like 'Amarr VIII (Oris)%' Can i be the first to say can i have your stuff?
Jenson Cole Red Dagger Fleet	Posted - 2006.09.04 12:27:00 - [58] While I belive that bookmarks need to be fixed in a way that it's a perminent fix I'm still undecided so here are my ideas. 1. Limit Bookmarks to no more than 100-150 per person. Along with the copy rule that will be added tuesday. 2. Create the skill that was rumored to be in the making months ago concerning warping. For every level trainned a number is added to a base formula to determine how close you arrive at a Stargate or Station (Warp points for missions work as they always have). With this you eliminate bookmarks to a large degree and with this add in the idea mentioned earlier that if a pilot wishes to pull there ship out of warp early allow them to using the Stop feature and only then set up a potential safe spot. (Limit the character to the 100-150 bookmark rule) If CCP went with this skill make it a rather cheap skill along the lines of a level 2 or 3 skill with a basic requisite of Navigation 2 or 3 prior to being able to train the skill. Either way they go SOMETHING will have to be done. If Bookmarks are a large enough issue that they have to post a warning concerning it some form of action will be required otherwise ALOT of new players are going to be really turned off about this game if it has consistant lag due to a massive database having issues.
Eron Lygera Gallente Sharded Awareness	Posted - 2006.09.04 13:26:00 - [59] Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. How many people has 50k bookmarks? Just curious.. With love Eron Ps. Dont nerf WCS!
Wilfan Ret'nub Singularity.	Posted - 2006.09.04 13:50:00 - [60] Originally by: Valar But they sure as hell know what I, the development DBA, PapaSmurf the network programmer and Fuhry the lead programmer think about bookmarks. Have you thought about "compacting" the bookmarks? Like if 2 BMs point to same location in same system (and are in places, not as an item in cargo hold/hangar), they get the same ItemID and thus only one line in the BM table? Or is it how it already works? ------ No ISK, no fun
Kalindra naskan Amarr Reprocity	Posted - 2006.09.04 15:34:00 - [61] Edited by: Kalindra naskan on 04/09/2006 15:34:33 I've been thinking just now, when rigs will be added to EVE, why not also create a specific Bookmark Database rig which is needed to store bookmarks. The rig would hold something like 50 - 100 bookmarks and are unique for each ship that have a BM storage rig. The BMs stored in the rig would also be locked to that ship, and can not be transfered to other ships. Although there might be a scout ship or something with a special ability to be able to transfer its bookmark database to a ship in your possesion that also have the rig installed. Possible also a starbase module that can store a few sets of bookmark databases. So instead of having thousands upon thousands of bookmarks you just have a small ammount for each ship. If you install a Bookmark Database rig that is. This means that you can't just have all the bookmarks availible everywhere, but need to customize the bookmarks to the ship. So if you have a trading ship, you got bookmarks for your trading runs stored there etc. As the database expert Valar, would this idea work for the eve database? --- This sig is rated "N" for Nonexistent It's nonexistent btw - Cortes Ok I fixed it, now what?
Wasak White	Posted - 2006.09.04 16:03:00 - [62] Edited by: Wasak White on 04/09/2006 16:03:33 Originally by: Valar Originally by: DropZone 187 First off, thanks for the clarification Valar. Nice to see a dev respond and hopefully it will happen more often. (Then again I would expect the extinction of forum trolls, but that is a high hope in itself) Secondly, out of curiosity, and also to put to bed the myths/rumors of bm impacts, roughly how much space as a percentage would be freed up if bms were all deleted? I think that would be big question. I got an idea, ban forum trolls! Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. EDIT: I'd like to add that the bookmarks table is the biggest table in the whole database. /off topic How big is the database?
ElCoCo Gallente KIA Corp	Posted - 2006.09.04 16:31:00 - [63] Well Valar, at least start (if it isn't like that already) seperating the actual critical stuff from the trivial... i.e. noone would honestly be mad if the market/escrow or whatever trivial thing took 30secs to load, but for a module to activate after 30secs... you get my point
Laendra	Posted - 2006.09.04 16:50:00 - [64] Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. seems that deleting BM's would be a godsend... devs, time to push the Big Red Button...delete the BM's!!! Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. When I look at database traces, all I see are bookmarks loading, being insterted, copied or changing owners. Nothing else in the database takes such a long time, so it doesn't show up in my traces. this wil probably be answered tomorrow since its dead of the night in iceland...but... is there ANY chance of BM's being deleted? we have a dev on our side... Something will be done about bookmarks. Game design is working on something, I don't know the details of it. But they sure as hell know what I, the development DBA, PapaSmurf the network programmer and Fuhry the lead programmer think about bookmarks. Give us "Warp to 0", it's the lesser of 2 evils. All you do otherwise is keep giving us reasons to make everyone have BMs. Figure out a work around (to stopping people in Empire) when you can actually devote some time to it. -------------------
Vargrh Gallente Stupid People Always Need Killing	Posted - 2006.09.04 16:55:00 - [65] CCP should contact via email accounts that have been inactive for over 12 months and where no subscription or training of the character has taken place. They should email the original email given when the account was set up or last updated instructing the owner this will occur 'a given number of months' from the date of the mail. A second email warning of that dates close arrival should occur a few weeks before the actual account termination date. People have a choice between ignoring the emails - account is subsequebntly deleted, acknowledging reciept and accepting deletion, or paying to reactivatre. To be honest accounts dormant for over 12 months are unlikely to be reactivated thou there are in acceptions.
Vargrh Gallente Stupid People Always Need Killing	Posted - 2006.09.04 16:59:00 - [66] Edited by: Vargrh on 04/09/2006 17:01:53 Originally by: Laendra Give us "Warp to 0", it's the lesser of 2 evils. All you do otherwise is keep giving us reasons to make everyone have BMs. Figure out a work around (to stopping people in Empire) when you can actually devote some time to it. Warp to 0 in empire 1.0 - 0.5 unless an active war in effect, or in a freigter, at which point you are always warped in at least 15km from the gate. 0.4 to 0.1 - warps you to 0 unless there is someone with 249km of the gate in any direction, at which point it defaults to 15km. 0.0 defaults to 0 if no one else in system or system 1 jump either direction of. otherwise defaults to 15km. Otherwise always default to 15km as intended from original game design. Change the game code so that only deployed 'anchorable' items can be bookmarked and the bookmark is automatically deleted once the item is unanchored.
Luigi Thirty Caldari	Posted - 2006.09.04 17:00:00 - [67] Valar, how large is the bookmarks table? How many entries?
Za Po Caldari	Posted - 2006.09.04 17:14:00 - [68] Originally by: Lazuran It is also important to realize that these performance issues are TECHNICAL problems and they should have TECHNICAL solutions and not be compensated by a modified gameplay like many people have proposed. That's a sound design principle. Another one is to make sure that your requirements are technically feasible before implementing them. And when you make a design mistake, sometimes you have to break some other rule in order to sort things out... Besides, there are solutions, such as corporate bookmarks, that are both desirable from a gameplay perspective and effective at cutting the amount of BMs on the server. :)
Cattraknoff Caldari Sha Kharn Corp Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.09.04 17:22:00 - [69] People often go inactive for months at a time, sometimes a year or more only to come back later. Deleting accounts really isn't necessary, especially when they could always come back and start paying again. Some one who was a trial account and only active for a couple weeks or whatever, then I could see deleting them, but somebody who subscribed for a reasonable length of time should be safe from deletion. Just my 2 cents. Sorry if somebody already said it.
Laendra	Posted - 2006.09.05 05:28:00 - [70] Edited by: Laendra on 05/09/2006 05:28:15 Originally by: Vargrh Edited by: Vargrh on 04/09/2006 17:01:53 Originally by: Laendra Give us "Warp to 0", it's the lesser of 2 evils. All you do otherwise is keep giving us reasons to make everyone have BMs. Figure out a work around (to stopping people in Empire) when you can actually devote some time to it. Warp to 0 in empire 1.0 - 0.5 unless an active war in effect, or in a freigter, at which point you are always warped in at least 15km from the gate. 0.4 to 0.1 - warps you to 0 unless there is someone with 249km of the gate in any direction, at which point it defaults to 15km. 0.0 defaults to 0 if no one else in system or system 1 jump either direction of. otherwise defaults to 15km. Otherwise always default to 15km as intended from original game design. Change the game code so that only deployed 'anchorable' items can be bookmarked and the bookmark is automatically deleted once the item is unanchored. The only problem with that, is that it still encourages the creation/copying of bookmarks...the only thing this would do would encourage a series of small secure cans setup at a given warp-to distance around the gates. And why ding freighters? They are already slow as hell, and getting to warp takes forever...if you can't MWD over to a freighter and scramble it before it gets to warp, you're very sad indeed. -------------------
Miss Overlord Gallente Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2006.09.05 05:32:00 - [71] if it was active for 3 or more months leave it if it was a quick one time wise nerf it after 12
Seehrak	Posted - 2006.09.13 14:17:00 - [72] I am curious about the bookmarks having an effect on the node change (i.e jumping in from a gate or warping in.) for example the other night. we have 20 odd ships near a gate. then everything freezes for a good 20 - 30 secs or so. then a blob of enemy ships appears. before it all settles down and carries on. would be good to get rid of this :) also seen some mentions of as skill that is not available to buy but is in game called warp navigation? that allows you to warp closer and more acurately towards an object per level.
Phalyssa Truixim	Posted - 2006.09.13 16:52:00 - [73] A larger database does effect performance to a certain extent because each query is going to have to traverse a larger amount of data. Simple solution would be to have a backup database that is populated with all the accounts that are greater than x months old (x being 18 or 24, whatever you think is appropriate). Then if an old user logs in and the main database does not return a result, query the old database and then restore him/her in the main database. As far as the bookmark problem goes..there are lots of ways of solving this. Limit bookmarks to 50. Reorganize the database so that only warpable bookmarks are returned. Make bookmarks untradable. Provide warp points within 2k and allow a small number of bookmarks. At the very least, there should be a hard, reasonable limit on bookmarks. Or even better, set a decay time on bookmarks so if that they aren't used for 3 months, they are destroyed.
FireFoxx80 Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.10.20 15:40:00 - [74] Originally by: Luigi Thirty Valar, how large is the bookmarks table? How many entries? I remember them saying that bookmarks account for something like 14% of all Eve data. What I do the rest of the time - Vote for a Jita bypass!
Traxman	Posted - 2006.10.20 15:54:00 - [75] Would it be any security breach to have BMs localy on the harddrive instead, and just call the 3 paramesters to jump to a place ? That way no BMs are stored at ccp's side, and copy BMs would be quite easy between friends. Even a small local database with BMs would be nice - do you see any breach in security with that Valar ?
Frogsley Puddings Corporation Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2006.10.20 16:07:00 - [76] Originally by: FireFoxx80 I remember them saying that bookmarks account for something like 14% of all Eve data. Holy necro, batman!
Paari Cuman Windsor Trade Organization The Imperial Order	Posted - 2006.10.20 16:11:00 - [77] Originally by: smeggy If someone hasnt activated their account in over 18 months I am sure they will never be played again. Not true. I've had an inactive account for 3 years and reactivated it this afternoon. :P
sesanti Minmatar Universal Exports Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.10.20 16:23:00 - [78] Originally by: Traxman Would it be any security breach to have BMs localy on the harddrive instead, and just call the 3 paramesters to jump to a place ? That way no BMs are stored at ccp's side, and copy BMs would be quite easy between friends. Even a small local database with BMs would be nice - do you see any breach in security with that Valar ? Yes, people could hack them (assuming they were encrypted) and spawn entire sets without even actually flying to the BM spot at all. _______________________________________________ The ShadowMaster - <I am a guy... don't mind the portrait>
Vashi Dokumentu The xDEATHx Squadron	Posted - 2006.10.20 16:34:00 - [79] I`d like to join this small chat, my question and sugestion to reduce the lag on load up is - option what was availabe to trash the something from ur items in long distance. Right now it`s not working, i mean when u r clicking on it nothing happend. I`m sure everybody has a lot of useless shutles and t1 modules, but go for it extra 60 jumps to trash them ??? cmon.....
Lord Sid Minmatar Lordless	Posted - 2006.10.20 16:52:00 - [80] The real benefit of clearing out old accounts would be freeing up the names that are currently inactive. -=Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds=-
Firequill Gallente The Black Ops Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.20 16:53:00 - [81] necro = bad
Kim Chee Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.20 17:31:00 - [82] I know nothing about the EVE database schema, but are all bookmarks really stored in a single table? That would put a LOT of work on both the index lookups and the database's ability to cache rows vs. pinning entire tables in memory. Looking to one of my own past projects, if you could break that up by character_id and region_id or even constellation_id, a large percentage of the entries would just sit on disk instead of being swapped in and out of the database's cache. A future INSTA wipe would become slightly more tedius, but any given player should only ever access other's bookmarks when they're in loot cans, or as entries on escrow. In those cases, it should just be an indexed ID field lookup. Bookmark copying would be much faster, since adding rows to an indexed 20K row table are trivial, but adding them to a 200M row table are a bit painful. You could even cap an individual's number of bookmarks by putting a limit on the table size itself. I'm not trying to be overly "smart" here, just poking an outsider's view in, in case it's helpful. I firmly believe one should never delete player data, as you never know who might remember the game years down the road and decide they want to play again. Disk space is cheap, just make sure that data stays on the disk and doesn't take up precious memory space. Another option is to move inactive player data off into a secondary schema that runs on slower hardware. If a player reactivates their account, it can be pushed back onto the main server via script. <=----=> *Vila Restal: I'm entitled to my opinion. Kerr Avon*: It is your assumption that we are entitled to it as well that is irritating.
Keleth	Posted - 2006.10.20 17:31:00 - [83] Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. seems that deleting BM's would be a godsend... devs, time to push the Big Red Button...delete the BM's!!! Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. When I look at database traces, all I see are bookmarks loading, being insterted, copied or changing owners. Nothing else in the database takes such a long time, so it doesn't show up in my traces. this wil probably be answered tomorrow since its dead of the night in iceland...but... is there ANY chance of BM's being deleted? we have a dev on our side... Something will be done about bookmarks. Game design is working on something, I don't know the details of it. But they sure as hell know what I, the development DBA, PapaSmurf the network programmer and Fuhry the lead programmer think about bookmarks. Still think giving people the right to manually warp to within 0 km of something (but making autopilot jumps still come in at 15 km out) and then deleting all the instas (or maybe just all BMs period--99% gotta be instas, people can recreate safe spots without too much trouble). Keleth
Pinpisa Jormao	Posted - 2006.10.20 17:33:00 - [84] The suggested performance issues from the bookmarks do not have anything to do with the the huge number of them itself. The problems derive from the design choices made that favor developer conviniency instead of having to spend a while more by throwing the old trash away and taking a fresh approach to solving the technical challenges. For example, is database the right choice for storing this type of data or is it just the most convinient? Imagine if every Windows/IE users Favorites were stored and queried from a single database at Redmond, Microsoft HQ. This is EXACTLY the kind of irrational design choices you see in every technical aspect of Eve.
Keleth	Posted - 2006.10.20 17:35:00 - [85] Originally by: Vargrh Edited by: Vargrh on 04/09/2006 17:01:53 Originally by: Laendra Give us "Warp to 0", it's the lesser of 2 evils. All you do otherwise is keep giving us reasons to make everyone have BMs. Figure out a work around (to stopping people in Empire) when you can actually devote some time to it. Warp to 0 in empire 1.0 - 0.5 unless an active war in effect, or in a freigter, at which point you are always warped in at least 15km from the gate. 0.4 to 0.1 - warps you to 0 unless there is someone with 249km of the gate in any direction, at which point it defaults to 15km. 0.0 defaults to 0 if no one else in system or system 1 jump either direction of. otherwise defaults to 15km. Otherwise always default to 15km as intended from original game design. Change the game code so that only deployed 'anchorable' items can be bookmarked and the bookmark is automatically deleted once the item is unanchored. Not working. People will drop small containers at their bookmarks spots. Then we'll have lag from umpty-billion BMs AND umpty-billion cans! Wheee! Keleth
Keleth	Posted - 2006.10.20 17:39:00 - [86] Originally by: Traxman Would it be any security breach to have BMs localy on the harddrive instead, and just call the 3 paramesters to jump to a place ? That way no BMs are stored at ccp's side, and copy BMs would be quite easy between friends. Even a small local database with BMs would be nice - do you see any breach in security with that Valar ? I give it three days, and there will be utility that lets you instantly create a bookmark anywhere you want it, without the tedium of actually having to go there or get it from someone who has. This is something not allowed in EVE at the moment. Whether it would not be tolerable is...an interesting question. Keleth
Pinpisa Jormao	Posted - 2006.10.20 17:49:00 - [87] Edited by: Pinpisa Jormao on 20/10/2006 17:49:11 Originally by: Keleth Originally by: Traxman Would it be any security breach to have BMs localy on the harddrive instead, and just call the 3 paramesters to jump to a place ? That way no BMs are stored at ccp's side, and copy BMs would be quite easy between friends. Even a small local database with BMs would be nice - do you see any breach in security with that Valar ? I give it three days, and there will be utility that lets you instantly create a bookmark anywhere you want it, without the tedium of actually having to go there or get it from someone who has. This is something not allowed in EVE at the moment. Whether it would not be tolerable is...an interesting question. Isn't the better question to ask what sense it makes to not be able determine a point relative to objects, "write it down" and then go there later? The Global positioning system in space are the stars, so as long as you can see them, you should be able to pick a point and go there. This will also remove the problem with current battles where the mechanics limit the battlefield arbitrarily to happen around very small area. A more sane game design (something not possible from CCP) would allow ships to intercept ships that are in warp by having covert op transmit the warp vectors to friendly ships by FTL so they could move in to bubble the hostile fleet during its warp.
Kim Chee Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.20 18:04:00 - [88] Originally by: Pinpisa Jormao For example, is database the right choice for storing this type of data or is it just the most convinient? Storing the bookmarks on the server side is the right choice, unless you want the kind of hack-fest that multi-player Diablo I became. The number one rule of multiplayer game design should be, the client only gets enough data to smoothly depict the player's current view of the universe... no more! You could choose to store them in flat files, which would be impossible to maintain (I know, I worked on a large system where the original developer hated SQL). Originally by: Pinpisa Jormao Imagine if every Windows/IE users Favorites were stored and queried from a single database at Redmond, Microsoft HQ. This is EXACTLY the kind of irrational design choices you see in every technical aspect of Eve. You might not have to imagine. Microsoft has wanted to convert Windows and all their other applications to services which you pay for over time (or per use). To accomplish that, they've spent quite a lot of time researching server-hosted applications. Originally by: Pinpisa Jormao If Google did that, it would work but that's because Google does not have SQL server as the bottleneck. What makes you think Google doesn't use SQL to store their backend data? SQL is not inherantly slow, it's a matter of partitioning the data to fit the load each server node can handle, and in such a way that queries can be optimized. One example that comes to mind is updating a row. In Oracle, doing a row update and rollback/insert on failure is fairly cheap. In PostgreSQL, it's cheaper to do a query first, then insert or update depending on the result. If you write queries in Postgres as if it were Oracle, it will be slow. <=----=> *Vila Restal: I'm entitled to my opinion. Kerr Avon*: It is your assumption that we are entitled to it as well that is irritating.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.10.20 18:07:00 - [89] due to the way you level in eve ( aka learning sp over time ) this is a terrible idea. I would be in favor of deleting bookmarks from inactive accounts though.
Barwinius Ars Caelestis Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.10.20 19:01:00 - [90] I wouldn't be very happy if I lost my secure container bookmarks or safe spots...
Red Six Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.20 19:32:00 - [91] Edited by: Red Six on 20/10/2006 19:34:44 Originally by: Eron Lygera Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. How many people has 50k bookmarks? Just curious.. I won't say I have 50K but a fair amount of 0.0 and some empire regions I have over 1000 for that region alone between tacticals and gate to gates. My guess is I have about 20K. Edit: Just realized this is a necro thread.
FireFoxx80 Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.10.21 12:12:00 - [92] My bad. When the forums b0rked the other way, this thread was on page 1. I didnt notice the date. What I do the rest of the time - Vote for a Jita bypass!
VanDuran Caldari General Miners	Posted - 2006.10.21 12:41:00 - [93] Edited by: VanDuran on 21/10/2006 12:43:32 Edit: ok, I only posted that once and it gave me a double post! deleted this one.. Ahh, more database food! hehe Descended from ancient fossil fuel miners on Earth..
VanDuran Caldari General Miners	Posted - 2006.10.21 12:41:00 - [94] Originally by: Resolve Edited by: Resolve on 03/09/2006 20:36:35 Databse entries does not equal less performance. If someone's been inactive, they're just an entry in the database that does not get accessed. Accessing the DB is what takes CPU time. Non-active players do not cause lag or decrease performance, no matter how many items or BMs they have. Many people take breaks from EVE and some come back after a year+ to see what's changed and to try again. Deleting their accounts helps no-one. And just deleting items from NPC corp members is so not an option. Just because someone left their corp before taking a break doesn't mean they should be targeted for deletion, give me a break. Removing inactive corps to free up some corp names may be an option, but that also has ramifications, namely Employment History. No it is not time to delete the inactive accounts, there is no need. I personally have 2 members in my corp that have not played for over 2.5 years. I said I would hold their spot should they choose to ever come back. I am cool with that cause it only 'buffs' my corp by 2 players.. However they and others that all started about the same time I did launched secure cans all over the place. I personally know about 12 or so people that have not been online in about that 2.5 years with a total of about 300 cans anchored in empire space.. now THAT DOES account for LAG in some belts so there has to be some hinderance to database performance.. I mean I am just One person that knows of that many inactive cans.. Just my 2 isk rant, hehe Descended from ancient fossil fuel miners on Earth..

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.